12

CHAPTER 12.

EARLY INCIDENTS IN OUR LORD'S PUBLIC MINISTRY.


FIRST CLEARING OF THE TEMPLE.

Soon after the marriage festivities in Cana, Jesus, accompanied by His
disciples, as also by His mother and other members of the family, went
to Capernaum, a town pleasantly situated near the northerly end of the
Sea of Galilee or Lake of Gennesaret[343] and the scene of many of our
Lord's miraculous works; indeed it came to be known as His own
city.[344] Because of the unbelief of its people it became a subject of
lamentation to Jesus when in sorrow He prefigured the judgment that
would befall the place.[345] The exact site of the city is at present
unknown. On this occasion Jesus tarried but a few days at Capernaum; for
the time of the annual Passover was near, and in compliance with Jewish
law and custom He went up to Jerusalem.

The synoptic Gospels,[346] which are primarily devoted to the labors of
Christ in Galilee, contain no mention of His attendance at the paschal
festival between His twelfth year and the time of His death; to John
alone are we indebted for the record of this visit at the beginning of
Christ's public ministry. It is not improbable that Jesus had been
present at other Passovers during the eighteen years over which the
evangelists pass in complete and reverent silence; but at any or all
such earlier visits, He, not being thirty years old, could not have
assumed the right or privilege of a teacher without contravening
established customs.[347] It is worth our attention to note that on
this, the first recorded appearance of Jesus in the temple subsequent to
His visit as a Boy, He should resume His "Father's business" where He
had before been engaged. It was in His Father's service that He had been
found in discussion with the doctors of the law,[348] and in His
Father's cause He was impelled to action on this later occasion.

The multitudinous and mixed attendance at the Passover celebration has
already received passing mention;[349] some of the unseemly customs that
prevailed are to be held in mind. The law of Moses had been supplemented
by a cumulative array of rules, and the rigidly enforced requirements as
to sacrifices and tribute had given rise to a system of sale and barter
within the sacred precincts of the House of the Lord. In the outer
courts were stalls of oxen, pens of sheep, cages of doves and pigeons;
and the ceremonial fitness of these sacrificial victims was cried aloud
by the sellers, and charged for in full measure. It was the custom also
to pay the yearly poll tribute of the sanctuary at this season--the
ransom offering required of every male in Israel, and amounting to half
a shekel[350] for each, irrespective of his relative poverty or wealth.
This was to be paid "after the shekel of the sanctuary," which
limitation, as rabbis had ruled, meant payment in temple coin. Ordinary
money, varieties of which bore effigies and inscriptions of heathen
import, was not acceptable, and as a result, money-changers plied a
thriving trade on the temple grounds.

Righteously indignant at what He beheld, zealous for the sanctity of His
Father's House, Jesus essayed to clear the place;[351] and, pausing not
for argument in words, He promptly applied physical force almost
approaching violence--the one form of figurative language that those
corrupt barterers for pelf could best understand. Hastily improvizing a
whip of small cords, He laid about Him on every side, liberating and
driving out sheep, oxen, and human traffickers, upsetting the tables of
the exchangers and pouring out their heterogeneous accumulations of
coin. With tender regard for the imprisoned and helpless birds He
refrained from assaulting their cages; but to their owners He said:
"Take these things hence;" and to all the greedy traders He thundered
forth a command that made them quail: "Make not my Father's house an
house of merchandise." His disciples saw in the incident a realization
of the psalmist's line: "The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up."[352]

The Jews, by which term we mean the priestly officials and rulers of the
people, dared not protest this vigorous action on the ground of
unrighteousness; they, learned in the law, stood self-convicted of
corruption, avarice, and of personal responsibility for the temple's
defilement. That the sacred premises were in sore need of a cleansing
they all knew; the one point upon which they dared to question the
Cleanser was as to why He should thus take to Himself the doing of what
was their duty. They practically submitted to His sweeping intervention,
as that of one whose possible investiture of authority they might be yet
compelled to acknowledge. Their tentative submission was based on fear,
and that in turn upon their sin-convicted consciences. Christ prevailed
over those haggling Jews by virtue of the eternal principle that right
is mightier than wrong, and of the psychological fact that consciousness
of guilt robs the culprit of valor when the imminence of just
retribution is apparent to his soul.[353] Yet, fearful lest He should
prove to be a prophet with power, such as no living priest or rabbi even
professed to be, they timidly asked for credentials of His
authority--"What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these
things?" Curtly, and with scant respect for this demand, so common to
wicked and adulterous men,[354] Jesus replied: "Destroy this temple and
in three days I will raise it up."[355]

Blinded by their own craft, unwilling to acknowledge the Lord's
authority, yet fearful of the possibility that they were opposing one
who had the right to act, the perturbed officials found in the words of
Jesus reference to the imposing temple of masonry within whose walls
they stood. They took courage; this strange Galilean, who openly flouted
their authority, spoke irreverently of their temple, the visible
expression of the profession they so proudly flaunted in words--that
they were children of the covenant, worshipers of the true and living
God, and hence superior to all heathen and pagan peoples. With seeming
indignation they rejoined: "Forty and six years was this temple in
building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?"[356] Though
frustrated in their desire to arouse popular indignation against Jesus
at this time, the Jews refused to forget or forgive His words. When
afterward He stood an undefended prisoner, undergoing an illegal
pretense of trial before a sin-impeached court, the blackest perjury
uttered against Him was that of the false witnesses who testified: "We
heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and
within three days I will build another made without hands."[357] And
while He hung in mortal suffering, the scoffers who passed by the cross
wagged their heads and taunted the dying Christ with "Ah, thou that
destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself, and
come down from the cross."[358] Yet His words to the Jews who had
demanded the credentials of a sign had no reference to the colossal
Temple of Herod, but to the sanctuary of His own body, in which, more
literally than in the man-built Holy of Holies, dwelt the ever living
Spirit of the Eternal God. "The Father is in me" was His doctrine.[359]

"He spake of the temple of His body," the real tabernacle of the Most
High.[360] This reference to the destruction of the temple of His body,
and the renewal thereof after three days, is His first recorded
prediction relating to His appointed death and resurrection. Even the
disciples did not comprehend the profound meaning of His words until
after His resurrection from the dead; then they remembered and
understood. The priestly Jews were not as dense as they appeared to be,
for we find them coming to Pilate while the body of the crucified Christ
lay in the tomb, saying: "Sir, we remember that that deceiver said,
while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again."[361] Though
we have many records of Christ having said that He would die and on the
third day would rise again, the plainest of such declarations were made
to the apostles rather than openly to the public. The Jews who waited
upon Pilate almost certainly had in mind the utterance of Jesus when
they had stood, nonplussed before Him, at the clearing of the temple
courts.[362]

Such an accomplishment as that of defying priestly usage and clearing
the temple purlieus by force could not fail to impress, with varied
effect, the people in attendance at the feast; and they, returning to
their homes in distant and widely separated provinces, would spread the
fame of the courageous Galilean Prophet. Many in Jerusalem believed on
Him at the time, mainly because they were attracted by the miracles He
wrought; but He refused to "commit himself unto them," realizing the
insecure foundation of their professions. Popular adulation was foreign
to His purpose; He wanted no motley following, but would gather around
Him such as received the testimony of His Messiahship from the Father.
"He knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man: for he
knew what was in man."[363]

The incident of Christ's forcible clearing of the temple is a
contradiction of the traditional conception of Him as of One so gentle
and unassertive in demeanor as to appear unmanly. Gentle He was, and
patient under affliction, merciful and long-suffering in dealing with
contrite sinners, yet stern and inflexible in the presence of hypocrisy,
and unsparing in His denunciation of persistent evil-doers. His mood was
adapted to the conditions to which He addressed Himself; tender words of
encouragement or burning expletives of righteous indignation issued with
equal fluency from His lips. His nature was no poetic conception of
cherubic sweetness ever present, but that of a Man, with the emotions
and passions essential to manhood and manliness. He, who often wept with
compassion, at other times evinced in word and action the righteous
anger of a God. But of all His passions, however gently they rippled or
strongly surged, He was ever master. Contrast the gentle Jesus moved to
hospitable service by the needs of a festal party in Cana, with the
indignant Christ plying His whip, and amidst commotion and turmoil of
His own making, driving cattle and men before Him as an unclean herd.


JESUS AND NICODEMUS.[364]

That the wonderful deeds wrought by Christ at and about the time of this
memorable Passover had led some of the learned, in addition to many of
the common people, to believe in Him, is evidenced by the fact that
Nicodemus, who was a Pharisee in profession and who occupied a high
place as one of the rulers of the Jews, came to Him on an errand of
inquiry. There is significance in the circumstance that this visit was
made at night. Apparently the man was impelled by a genuine desire to
learn more of the Galilean, whose works could not be ignored; though
pride of office and fear of possible suspicion that he had become
attached to the new Prophet led him to veil his undertaking with
privacy.[365] Addressing Jesus by the title he himself bore, and which
he regarded as one of honor and respect, he said: "Rabbi, we know that
thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that
thou doest, except God be with him."[366] Whether his use of the plural
pronoun "we" indicates that he was sent by the Sanhedrin, or by the
society of Pharisees--the members of which were accustomed to so speak,
as representatives of the order--or was employed in the rhetorical sense
as indicating himself alone, is of little importance. He acknowledged
Jesus as a "teacher come from God," and gave reasons for so regarding
Him. Whatever of feeble faith might have been stirring in the heart of
the man, such was founded on the evidence of miracles, supported mainly
by the psychological effect of signs and wonders. We must accord him
credit for sincerity and honesty of purpose.

Without waiting for specific questions, "Jesus answered and said unto
him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he
cannot see the kingdom of God." Nicodemus appears to have been puzzled;
he asked how such a rejuvenation was possible. "How can a man be born
when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and
be born?" We do Nicodemus no injustice in assuming that he as a rabbi, a
man learned in the scriptures, ought to have known that there was other
meaning in the words of Jesus than that of a mortal, literal birth.
Moreover, were it possible that a man could be born a second time
literally and in the flesh, how could such a birth profit him in
spiritual growth? It would be but a reentrance on the stage of physical
existence, not an advancement. The man knew that the figure of a new
birth was common in the teachings of his day. Every proselyte to Judaism
was spoken of at the time of his conversion as one new-born.

The surprize manifested by Nicodemus was probably due, in part at least,
to the universality of the requirement as announced by Christ. Were the
children of Abraham included? The traditionalism of centuries was
opposed to any such view. Pagans had to be born again through a formal
acceptance of Judaism, if they would become even small sharers of the
blessings that belonged as a heritage to the house of Israel; but Jesus
seemed to treat all alike, Jews and Gentiles, heathen idolaters and the
people who with their lips at least called Jehovah, God.

Jesus repeated the declaration, and with precision, emphasizing by the
impressive "Verily, verily," the greatest lesson that had ever saluted
the ears of this ruler in Israel: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee,
Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into
the kingdom of God." That the new birth thus declared to be absolutely
essential as a condition of entrance into the kingdom of God, applicable
to every man, without limitation or qualification, was a spiritual
regeneration, was next explained to the wondering rabbi: "That which is
born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is
spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." Still
the learned Jew pondered yet failed to comprehend. Possibly the sound of
the night breeze was heard at that moment; if so, Jesus was but
utilizing the incident as a skilful teacher would do to impress a lesson
when He continued: "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest
the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it
goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." Plainly stated,
Nicodemus was given to understand that his worldly learning and official
status availed him nothing in any effort to understand the things of
God; through the physical sense of hearing he knew that the wind blew;
by sight he could be informed of its passage: yet what did he know of
the ultimate cause of even this simple phenomenon? If Nicodemus would
really be instructed in spiritual matters, he had to divest himself of
the bias due to his professed knowledge of lesser things.

Rabbi and eminent Sanhedrist though he was, there at the humble lodging
of the Teacher from Galilee, he was in the presence of a Master. In the
bewilderment of ignorance he asked, "How can these things be?" The reply
must have been humbling if not humiliating to the man: "Art thou a
master of Israel, and knowest not these things?" Plainly a knowledge of
some of the fundamental principles of the gospel had been before
accessible; Nicodemus was held in reproach for his lack of knowledge,
particularly as he was a teacher of the people. Then our Lord graciously
expounded at greater length, testifying that He spoke from sure
knowledge, based upon what He had seen, while Nicodemus and his fellows
were unwilling to accept the witness of His words. Furthermore, Jesus
averred His mission to be that of the Messiah, and specifically foretold
His death and the manner thereof--that He, the Son of Man, must be
lifted up, even as Moses had lifted the serpent in the wilderness as a
prototype, whereby Israel might escape the fatal plague.[367]

The purpose of the foreappointed death of the Son of Man was: "That
whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life";
for to this end, and out of His boundless love to man had the Father
devoted His Only Begotten Son. And further, while it was true that in
His mortal advent the Son had not come to sit as a judge, but to teach,
persuade and save, nevertheless condemnation would surely follow
rejection of that Savior, for light had come, and wicked men avoided the
light, hating it in their preference for the darkness in which they
hoped to hide their evil deeds. Here again, perhaps, Nicodemus
experienced a twinge of conscience, for had not he been afraid to come
in the light, and had he not chosen the dark hours for his visit? Our
Lord's concluding words combined both instruction and reproof: "But he
that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made
manifest, that they are wrought in God."

The narrative of this interview between Nicodemus and the Christ
constitutes one of our most instructive and precious scriptures relating
to the absolute necessity of unreserved compliance with the laws and
ordinances of the gospel, as the means indispensable to salvation. Faith
in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, through whom alone men may gain
eternal life; the forsaking of sin by resolute turning away from the
gross darkness of evil to the saving light of righteousness; the
unqualified requirement of a new birth through baptism in water, and
this of necessity by the mode of immersion, since otherwise the figure
of a birth would be meaningless; and the completion of the new birth
through baptism by the Spirit--all these principles are taught herein in
such simplicity and plainness as to make plausible no man's excuse for
ignorance.

If Jesus and Nicodemus were the only persons present at the interview,
John, the writer, must have been informed thereof by one of the two. As
John was one of the early disciples, afterward one of the apostles, and
as he was distinguished in the apostolic company by his close personal
companionship with the Lord, it is highly probable that he heard the
account from the lips of Jesus. It was evidently John's purpose to
record the great lesson of the occasion rather than to tell the
circumstantial story. The record begins and ends with equal abruptness;
unimportant incidents are omitted; every line is of significance; the
writer fully realized the deep import of his subject and treated it
accordingly. Later mention of Nicodemus tends to confirm the estimate of
the man as he appears in this meeting with Jesus--that of one who was
conscious of a belief in the Christ, but whose belief was never
developed into such genuine and virile faith as would impel to
acceptance and compliance irrespective of cost or consequence.[368]


FROM CITY TO COUNTRY.

Leaving Jerusalem, Jesus and His disciples went into the rural parts of
Judea, and there tarried, doubtless preaching as opportunity was found
or made; and those who believed on Him were baptized.[369] The prominent
note of His early public utterances was that of His forerunner in the
wilderness: "Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."[370] The
Baptist continued his labors; though doubtless, since his recognition of
the Greater One for whose coming he had been sent to prepare, he
considered the baptism he administered as of somewhat different
significance. He had at first baptized in preparation for One who was to
come; now he baptized repentant believers unto Him who had come.

Disputation had arisen between some of John's zealous adherents and one
or more Jews[371] concerning the doctrine of purifying. The context[372]
leaves little room for doubt that a question was involved as to the
relative merits of John's baptism and that administered by the disciples
of Jesus. With excusable ardor and well-intended zeal for their master,
the disciples of John, who had been embroiled in the dispute, came to
him saying: "Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou
bearest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him."
John's supporters were concerned at the success of One whom they
regarded in some measure as a rival to their beloved teacher. Had not
John given to Jesus His first attestation? "He to whom thou bearest
witness" said they, not deigning even to designate Jesus by name.
Following the example of Andrew, and of John the future apostle, the
people were leaving the Baptist and gathering about the Christ. John's
reply to his ardent followers constitutes a sublime instance of
self-abnegation. His answer was to this effect: A man receives only as
God gives unto him. It is not given to me to do the work of Christ. Ye
yourselves are witnesses that I disclaimed being the Christ, and that I
said I was one sent before Him. He is as the Bridegroom; I am only as
the friend of the bridegroom,[373] His servant; and I rejoice greatly in
being thus near Him; His voice gives me happiness; and thus my joy is
fulfilled. He of whom you speak stands at the beginning of His ministry;
I near the end of mine. He must increase but I must decrease. He came
from heaven and therefore is superior to all things of earth;
nevertheless men refuse to receive His testimony. To such a One, the
Spirit of God is not apportioned; it is His in full measure. The Father
loveth Him, the Son, and hath given all things into His hand, and: "He
that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth
not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on
him."[374]

In such a reply, under the existent conditions, is to be found the
spirit of true greatness, and of a humility that could rest only on a
conviction of divine assurance to the Baptist as to himself and the
Christ. In more than one sense was John great among all who are born of
women.[375] He had entered upon his work when sent of God so to do;[376]
he realized that his work had been in a measure superseded, and he
patiently awaited his release, in the meantime continuing in the
ministry, directing souls to his Master. The beginning of the end was
near. He was soon seized and thrown into a dungeon; where, as shall be
shown, he was beheaded to sate the vengeance of a corrupt woman whose
sins he had boldly denounced.[377]

The Pharisees observed with increasing apprehension the growing
popularity of Jesus, evidenced by the fact that even more followed after
Him and accepted baptism at the hands of His disciples than had
responded to the Baptist's call. Open opposition was threatened; and as
Jesus desired to avert the hindrance to His work which such persecution
at that time would entail, He withdrew from Judea and retired to
Galilee, journeying by way of Samaria. This return to the northern
province was effected after the Baptist had been cast into prison.[378]


NOTES TO CHAPTER 12.

1. Sea of Galilee.--This, the largest body of fresh water in Palestine,
is somewhat pear-shape in outline and measures approximately thirteen
miles in extreme length on a northerly-southerly line and between six
and seven miles in greatest width. The river Jordan enters it at the
northeast extremity and flows out at the south-west; the lake may be
regarded, therefore, as a great expansion of the river, though the
water-filled depression is about two hundred feet in depth. The
outflowing Jordan connects the sea of Galilee with the Dead Sea, the
latter a body of intensely saline water, which in its abundance of
dissolved salts and in the consequent density of its brine is comparable
to the Great Salt Lake in Utah, though the chemical composition of the
waters is materially different. The sea of Galilee is referred to by
Luke, in accordance with its more appropriate classification as a lake
(Luke 5:1, 2; 8:22, 23, 33). Adjoining the lake on the north-west is a
plain, which in earlier times was highly cultivated: this was known as
the land of Gennesaret (Matt. 14:34; Mark 6:53); and the water body came
to be known as the sea or lake of Gennesaret (Luke 5:1). From the
prominence of one of the cities on its western shore, it was known also
as the sea of Tiberias (John 6:1,23; 21:1). In the Old Testament it is
called the sea of Chinnereth (Numb. 34:11) or Chinneroth (Josh. 12:3)
after the name of a contiguous city (Josh. 19:35). The surface of the
lake or sea is several hundred feet below normal sea-level, 681 feet
lower than the Mediterranean according to Zenos, or 700 feet as stated
by some others. This low-lying position gives to the region a
semi-tropical climate. Zenos, in the _Standard Bible Dictionary_, says:
"The waters of the lake are noted for abundant fish. The industry of
fishing was accordingly one of the most stable resources of the country
round about.... Another feature of the sea of Galilee is its
susceptibility to sudden storms. These are occasioned partly by its
lying so much lower than the surrounding tableland (a fact that creates
a difference of temperature and consequent disturbances in the
atmosphere), and partly by the rushing of gusts of wind down the Jordan
valley from the heights of Hermon. The event recorded in Matt. 8:24 is
no extraordinary case. Those who ply boats on the lake are obliged to
exercize great care to avoid peril from such storms. The shores of the
sea of Galilee as well as the lake itself were the scenes of many of the
most remarkable events recorded in the Gospels."

2. The Four Gospels.--All careful students of the New Testament must
have observed that the books of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, treat the
events of the Savior's sayings and doings in Galilee with greater
fulness than they accord to His work in Judea; the book or Gospel of
John, on the other hand, treats particularly the incidents of our Lord's
Judean ministry, without excluding, however, important events that
occurred in Galilee. In style of writing and method of treatment, the
authors of the first three Gospels (evangelists as they and John are
collectively styled in theologic literature) differ more markedly from
the author of the fourth Gospel than among themselves. The events
recorded by the first three can be more readily classified, collated, or
arranged, and in consequence the Gospels written by Matthew, Mark, and
Luke are now commonly known as the Synoptics, or Synoptic Gospels.

3. Thirty Years of Age.--According to Luke (3:23) Jesus was about thirty
years of age at the time of His baptism, and we find that soon
thereafter, He entered publicly upon the work of His ministry. The law
provided that at the age of thirty years the Levites were required to
enter upon their special service (Numb. 4:3). Clarke, _Bible
Commentary_, treating the passage in Luke 3:23, says: "This was the age
required by the law to which the priests must arrive before they could
be installed in their office." Jesus may possibly have had regard for
what had become a custom of the time, in waiting until He had attained
that age before entering publicly on the labors of a Teacher among the
people. Not being of Levitical descent He was not eligible to priestly
ordination in the Aaronic order, and therefore, certainly did not wait
for such before beginning His ministry. To have taught in public at an
earlier age would have been to arouse criticism, and objection, which
might have resulted in serious handicap or hindrance at the outset.

4. Throngs and Confusion at the Passover Festival.--While it is
admittedly impossible that even a reasonably large fraction of the
Jewish people could be present at the annual Passover gatherings at
Jerusalem, and in consequence provision was made for local observance of
the feast, the usual attendance at the temple celebration in the days of
Jesus was undoubtedly enormous. Josephus calls the Passover throngs "an
innumerable multitude" (Wars, ii, 1:3), and in another place (Wars, vi,
9:3) states that the attendance reached the enormous aggregate of three
millions of souls; such is the record, though many modern writers treat
the statement as an exaggeration. Josephus says that for the purpose of
giving the emperor Nero information as to the numerical strength of the
Jewish people, particularly in Palestine, the chief priests were asked
by Cestius to count the number of lambs slain at the feast, and the
number reported was 256,500, which on the basis of between ten and
eleven persons to each paschal table would indicate the presence, he
says, of at least 2,700,200, not including visitors other than Jews, and
such of the people of Israel as were debarred from participation in the
paschal meal because of ceremonial unfitness.

The scenes of confusion, inevitable under the conditions then
prevailing, are admirably summarized by Geikie (_Life and Words of
Christ_, chap. 30), who cites many earlier authorities for his
statements: "The streets were blocked by the crowds from all parts, who
had to make their way to the Temple, past flocks of sheep, and droves of
cattle, pressing on in the sunken middle part of each street reserved
for them, to prevent contact and defilement. Sellers of all possible
wares beset the pilgrims, for the great feasts were, as has been said,
the harvest time of all trades at Jerusalem, just as, at Mecca, even at
this day, the time of the great concourse of worshippers at the tomb of
the Prophet, is that of the busiest trade among the merchant pilgrims,
who form the caravans from all parts of the Mohammedan world.

"Inside the Temple space, the noise and pressure were, if possible,
worse. Directions were posted up to keep to the right or the left, as in
the densest thoroughfares of London. The outer court, which others than
Jews might enter, and which was, therefore, known as the Court of the
Heathen, was in part, covered with pens for sheep, goats, and cattle,
for the feast and the thank-offerings. Sellers shouted the merits of
their beasts, sheep bleated, and oxen lowed. It was, in fact, the great
yearly fair of Jerusalem, and the crowds added to the din and tumult,
till the services in the neighboring courts were sadly disturbed.
Sellers of doves, for poor women coming for purification from all parts
of the country, and for others, had a space set apart for them. Indeed,
the sale of doves was, in great measure, secretly, in the hands of the
priests themselves: Hannas, the high priest, especially, gaining great
profits from his dove cotes on Mount Olivet. The rents of the sheep and
cattle pens, and the profits on the doves, had led the priests to
sanction the incongruity of thus turning the Temple itself into a noisy
market. Nor was this all. Potters pressed on the pilgrims their clay
dishes and ovens for the Passover lamb; hundreds of traders recommended
their wares aloud; shops for wine, oil, salt, and all else needed for
sacrifices, invited customers; and, in addition, persons going across
the city, with all kinds of burdens, shortened their journey by crossing
the Temple grounds. The provision for paying the tribute, levied on all,
for the support of the Temple, added to the distraction. On both sides
of the east Temple gate, stalls had for generations been permitted for
changing foreign money. From the fifteenth of the preceding month
money-changers had been allowed to set up their tables in the city, and
from the twenty-first,--or twenty days before the Passover,--to ply
their trade in the Temple itself. Purchasers of materials for offerings
paid the amount at special stalls, to an officer of the Temple, and
received a leaden cheque for which they got what they had bought, from
the seller. Large sums, moreover, were changed, to be cast, as free
offerings, into one of the thirteen chests which formed the Temple
treasury. Every Jew, no matter how poor, was, in addition, required to
pay yearly a half-shekel--about eighteen pence--as atonement money for
his soul, and for the support of the Temple. As this would not be
received except in a native coin, called the Temple shekel, which was
not generally current, strangers had to change their Roman, Greek, or
Eastern money, at the stalls of the money-changers, to get the coin
required. The trade gave ready means for fraud, which was only too
common. Five per cent. exchange was charged, but this was indefinitely
increased by tricks and chicanery, for which the class had everywhere
earned so bad a name, that like the publicans, their witness would not
be taken before a court."

Touching the matter of the defilement to which the temple courts had
been subjected by traffickers acting under priestly license, Farrar,
(_Life of Christ_, p. 152), gives us the following: "And this was the
entrance-court to the Temple of the Most High! The court which was a
witness that that house should be a House of Prayer for all nations had
been degraded into a place which, for foulness, was more like shambles,
and for bustling commerce more like a densely-crowded bazaar; while the
lowing of oxen, the bleating of sheep, the Babel of many languages, the
huckstering and wrangling, and the clinking of money and of balances
(perhaps not always just), might be heard in the adjoining courts,
disturbing the chant of the Levites and the prayers of priests!"

5. The Servility of the Jews in the Presence of Jesus.--The record of
the achievement of Jesus, in ridding the temple courts of those who had
made the House of the Lord a market place, contains nothing to suggest
the inference that He exercized superhuman strength or more than manly
vigor. He employed a whip of His own making, and drove all before Him.
They fled helter-skelter. None are said to have voiced an objection
until the expulsion had been made complete. Why did not some among the
multitude object? The submission appears to have been abject and servile
in the extreme. Farrar, (_Life of Christ_, pp. 151, 152) raises the
question and answers it with excellent reasoning and in eloquent lines:
"Why did not this multitude of ignorant pilgrims resist? Why did these
greedy chafferers content themselves with dark scowls and muttered
maledictions, while they suffered their oxen and sheep to be chased into
the streets and themselves ejected, and their money flung rolling on the
floor, by one who was then young and unknown, and in the garb of
despised Galilee? Why, in the same way we might ask, did Saul suffer
Samuel to beard him in the very presence of his army? Why did David
abjectly obey the orders of Joab? Why did Ahab not dare to arrest Elijah
at the door of Naboth's vineyard? Because sin is weakness; because there
is in the world nothing so abject as a guilty conscience, nothing so
invincible as the sweeping tide of a Godlike indignation against all
that is base and wrong. How could these paltry sacrilegious buyers and
sellers, conscious of wrongdoing, oppose that scathing rebuke, or face
the lightnings of those eyes that were enkindled by an outraged
holiness? When Phinehas the priest was zealous for the Lord of Hosts,
and drove through the bodies of the prince of Simeon and the Midianitish
woman with one glorious thrust of his indignant spear, why did not
guilty Israel avenge that splendid murder? Why did not every man of the
tribe of Simeon become a Goel to the dauntless assassin? Because Vice
cannot stand for one moment before Virtue's uplifted arm. Base and
grovelling as they were, these money-mongering Jews felt, in all that
remnant of their souls which was not yet eaten away by infidelity and
avarice, that the Son of Man was right.

"Nay, even the Priests and Pharisees, and Scribes and Levites, devoured
as they were by pride and formalism, could not condemn an act which
might have been performed by a Nehemiah or a Judas Maccabaeus, and which
agreed with all that was purest and best in their traditions. But when
they had heard of this deed, or witnessed it, and had time to recover
from the breathless mixture of admiration, disgust, and astonishment
which it inspired, they came to Jesus, and though they did not dare to
condemn what He had done, yet half indignantly asked Him for some sign
that He had a right to act thus."

6. Jewish Regard for the Temple.--The Jews professed high regard for the
temple. "An utterance of the Savior, construed by the dark-minded as an
aspersion upon the temple, was used against Him as one of the chief
accusations on which His death was demanded. When the Jews clamored for
a sign of His authority He predicted His own death and subsequent
resurrection, saying, 'Destroy this temple, and in three days I will
raise it up,' (John 2:19-22; see also Matt. 26:61; 27:40; Mark 14:58;
15:29). They blindly regarded this remark as a disrespectful allusion to
their temple, a structure built by human hands, and they refused to
forget or forgive. That this veneration continued after the crucifixion
of our Lord is evident from accusations brought against Stephen, and
still later against Paul. In their murderous rage the people accused
Stephen of disrespect for the temple, and brought false witnesses who
uttered perjured testimony saying, 'This man ceaseth not to speak
blasphemous words against this holy place.' (Acts 6:13.) And Stephen was
numbered with the martyrs. When it was claimed that Paul had brought
with him into the temple precincts, a Gentile, the whole city was
aroused, and the infuriated mob dragged Paul from the place and sought
to kill him. (Acts 21:26-31.)"--The author; _House of the Lord_, pp. 60,
61.

7. Some of the "Chief Rulers" Believed.--Nicodemus was not the only one
among the ruling classes who believed in Jesus; but of most of these we
learn nothing to indicate that they had sufficient courage to come even
by night to make independent and personal inquiry. They feared the
result in loss of popularity and standing. We read in John 12:42, 43:
"Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but
because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be
put out of the synagogue: for they loved the praise of men more than the
praise of God." Note also the instance of the scribe who proffered to
become a professed disciple, but, probably because of some degree of
insincerity or unfitness, was rather discouraged than approved by Jesus.
(Matt. 8:19, 20.)

8. Nicodemus.--The course followed by this man evidences at once that he
really believed in Jesus as one sent of God, and that his belief failed
of development into a condition of true faith, which, had it but been
realized, might have led to a life of devoted service in the Master's
cause. When at a later stage than that of his interview with Christ the
chief priests and Pharisees upbraided the officers whom they had sent to
take Jesus into custody and who returned to report their failure,
Nicodemus, one of the council, ventured to mildly expostulate against
the murderous determination of the rulers, by stating a general
proposition in interrogative form: "Doth our law judge any man before it
hear him and know what he doeth?" He was answered by his colleagues with
contempt, and appears to have abandoned his well-intended effort (John
7:50-53; read preceding verses 30-49). We next hear of him bringing a
costly contribution of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred-weight, to be
used in the burial of Christ's then crucified body; but even in this
deed of liberality and devotion, in which his sincerity of purpose
cannot well be questioned, he had been preceded by Joseph of Arimathea,
a man of rank, who had boldly asked for and secured the body for
reverent burial (John 19:38-42). Nevertheless Nicodemus did more than
did most of his believing associates among the noble and great ones; and
to him let all due credit be given; he will not fail of his reward.

9. "The Jews" or "A Jew."--We read that "there arose a question between
some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying" (John 3:25).
Bearing in mind that the expression "the Jews" is very commonly used by
the author of the fourth Gospel to designate the officials or rulers
among the people, the passage quoted may be understood to mean that the
Baptist's disciples were engaged in disputation with the priestly
rulers. It is held, however, by Biblical scholars generally, that "the
Jews" in this passage is a mistranslation, and that the true rendering
is "a Jew." The disputation concerning purifying appears to have arisen
between some of the Baptist's followers and a single opponent; and the
passage as it appears in the King James version of the Bible is an
instance of scripture not translated correctly.

10. Friend of the Bridegroom.--Judean marriage customs in the days of
Christ required the appointing of a chief grooms-man, who attended to
all the preliminaries and made arrangements for the marriage feast, in
behalf of the bridegroom. He was distinctively known as the friend of
the bridegroom. When the ceremonial requirements had been complied with,
and the bride had been legally and formally given unto her spouse, the
joy of the bridegroom's friend was fulfilled inasmuch as his appointed
duties had been successfully discharged. (John 3:29.) According to
Edersheim, (_Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah_, vol. 1, p. 148), by
the simpler customs prevalent in Galilee a "friend of the bridegroom"
was not often chosen; and (pp. 663-4) the expression "children of the
bridechamber" (Matt. 9:15; Mark 2:19; Luke 5:34, in all of which
citations the expression is used by Jesus), was applied collectively to
all the invited guests at a wedding festival. He says: "As the
institution of 'friends of the bridegroom' prevailed in Judea, but not
in Galilee, this marked distinction of the 'friend of the bridegroom' in
the mouth of the Judean John, and 'sons (children) of the bridechamber'
in that of the Galilean Jesus, is itself evidential of historic
accuracy."

11. The Atonement Money.--In the course of the exodus, the Lord required
of every male in Israel who was twenty years old or older at the time of
a census the payment of a ransom, amounting to half a shekel (Exo.
30:12-16). See pages 383 and 396 herein. As to the use to which this
money was to be put, the Lord thus directed Moses: "And thou shalt take
the atonement money of the children of Israel, and shalt appoint it for
the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; that it may be a
memorial unto the children of Israel before the Lord, to make an
atonement for your souls" (Exo. 30:16; see also 38:25-31). In time, the
tax of half a shekel, equivalent to a bekah (Exo. 38:26), was collected
annually, though for this exaction no scriptural authority is of record.
This tax must not be confused with the redemption money, amounting to
five shekels for every firstborn male, the payment of which exempted the
individual from service in the labors of the sanctuary. In place of the
firstborn sons in all the tribes, the Lord designated the Levites for
this special ministry; nevertheless He continued to hold the firstborn
males as peculiarly His own, and required the payment of a ransom as a
mark of their redemption from the duties of exclusive service. See Exo.
13:12, 13-15; Numb. 3:13, 40-51; 8:15-18; 18:15, 16; also pages 95, 96
herein.